How many cases will it take before sane people realize what a bad law this is? I've argued many times in this forum what a can of worms SYG is and how it basically justifies the use of lethal force where previously it could have been avoided. Step back in time and welcome to the wild west! As I see new ones, I'll add them.
The Bottom Line: If you let people kill each other legally, they will. We as a society must decide what standard we will accept for such action.

Modern laws should be based on tests for proportionality and reasonableness. Most are. This SYG nonsense is cowboy law.

It's not cowboy law. The person that is standing their ground is not going out looking for the bad guy and exacting justice. The person standing their ground is not shooting someone for taking their parking spot or cheating at cards.

Why should someone be required to run away in fear? That just gives criminals more power. No consequences for robbing a family or raping and murdering a woman out walking in the evening? Seems backwards to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chabig

Why can't we ask the criminals not to invade my ground?

Well that is just too dang logical there. Criminals have WAY more rights than the victims don't you know? We can't ask them to just not be criminals, not rape people, not murder people...that would take away their right to do whatever the heck they please.

I find it so disheartening that so many people consider it better to just kill someone who has given you a threat/disrespect (imagined our not). The disrespect for life is deplorable. The disrespect as well as just the desire for ease and quickness of using guns makes me sick. If deadly force is the only thing left to protect yourself, fine. But it's a last resort, not a first/only resort.

It's not cowboy law. The person that is standing their ground is not going out looking for the bad guy and exacting justice. The person standing their ground is not shooting someone for taking their parking spot or cheating at cards.

no only for having sex or looking threatening when your not. This law encourages people to shoot first and think later.

I find it so disheartening that so many people consider it better to just kill someone who has given you a threat/disrespect (imagined our not). The disrespect for life is deplorable. The disrespect as well as just the desire for ease and quickness of using guns makes me sick. If deadly force is the only thing left to protect yourself, fine. But it's a last resort, not a first/only resort.

The law does not allow you to shoot someone if they disrespect you. No one in their right mind is going to shoot someone because they called them a fat ass.

You people need to really read the laws and have a better understanding of them before you make silly comments like that.

Let's use Florida as an example. Here's section 776.013 dealing with home protection. It doesn't let you shoot the girl scout there to sell cookies.

what you did not read the OP's links? I think it does give people more freedom to shoot without paying the price for a mistake.

Yea, 8 slanted links based on the OP's agenda.

Without paying the price for a mistake? There is no mistake if a criminal threatens my family or smashes in my door and comes in my house. Should I be required to gather up my family and run into the woods to hide? I am sure the criminal will give me ample time to get my family dressed and get shoes and coats on and get out of the house before he starts doing whatever he came there to do.

Why should someone be required to run away in fear? That just gives criminals more power. No consequences for robbing a family or raping and murdering a woman out walking in the evening? Seems backwards to me.

Do you really not realize that there are other consequences for those actions besides being shot on the street?

If someone tries to do those actions then they will be arrested, and have consequences such as being locked up in jail for a long time. Obviously if it is impossible to safely escape a situation then the victim should be able to use a reasonable amount of force to stop the criminal.

__________________
"Jesus was the first socialist, the first to seek a better life for mankind." -Mikhail Gorbachev

Do you really not realize that there are other consequences for those actions besides being shot on the street?

If someone tries to do those actions then they will be arrested, and have consequences such as being locked up in jail for a long time. Obviously if it is impossible to safely escape a situation then the victim should be able to use a reasonable amount of force to stop the criminal.

Yea, I'm sure that will make my wife feel lots better after she is raped and our son killed. That guy is going to jail. Sweet.

So the victim should die happy, knowing their assailant will be locked up in jail for a long time? I don't think so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AppleCruncher

Yea, I'm sure that will make my wife feel lots better after she is raped and our son killed. That guy is going to jail. Sweet.

I never said you shouldn't be able to defend yourself, just that you should make every effort to try to escape before you start trying to use force, especially deadly force, to stop the person. Your wife in this hypothetical situation could use pepper spray, and then get away followed by having the police arrest the guy, the result then is the rape gets stopped, and the guy arrested, and no one is dead.

The problem with Stand Your Ground laws, and their supporters is that they assume that there are only options of letting the person kill or rape you, or shooting first. In reality there are more options almost all the time.

__________________
"Jesus was the first socialist, the first to seek a better life for mankind." -Mikhail Gorbachev

Without paying the price for a mistake? There is no mistake if a criminal threatens my family or smashes in my door and comes in my house. Should I be required to gather up my family and run into the woods to hide? I am sure the criminal will give me ample time to get my family dressed and get shoes and coats on and get out of the house before he starts doing whatever he came there to do.

So, do you agree with the guy in one of the links who shot in the back the two men who burglarized his neighbor's house?

__________________
A lack of planning on your part should not constitute an emergency on mine.

You're putting the burden on the victim when the criminal should be held responsible. It's a fundamental difference of opinion between you and me. I believe everyone should be at liberty to defend themselves, and to use deadly force when they are reasonably in fear of life or limb.

----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrkramer

The problem with Stand Your Ground laws, and their supporters is that they assume that there are only options of letting the person kill or rape you, or shooting first. In reality there are more options almost all the time.

I disagree. It's the detractors, like you, who continue to paint the law as black and white, who make it sound like there are only two options. I recognize that there are often other options, and most of the time those options are chosen, or you'd see self defense killings every day. But I simply do not believe the victim should be required by law to run away.

The only issue I have with the Stand Your Ground law is how misused it is.

I remember a few months back where a guy walked in on his wife having an affair and killed the guy. He successfully used the stand your ground law in getting off because he thought his wife was being raped....

The only issue I have with the Stand Your Ground law is how misused it is.

I remember a few months back where a guy walked in on his wife having an affair and killed the guy. He successfully used the stand your ground law in getting off because he thought his wife was being raped....

I can only comment on this from knowledge of stories reported in our media, but it does seem there are many cases where the law is abused like you say.

If I walked into my house after a day at work and a burglary was in progress, I would probably tackle them if I thought it was relatively safe, or try and record or photograph them and pass it onto the police. I wouldn't consider using deadly force. At the end of the day most burglars are there to steal your stuff, not steel your stuff and murder the householder at the same time. It does happen of course but is extremely rare here. I'd be very upset if I was burgled, but wanting the thief dead is a little extreme I think.

Plus there is the life long torment of knowing you have killed someone that you'd have to deal with.